pith. sign in

arxiv: 1907.07714 · v1 · pith:6JHYESJ5new · submitted 2019-07-17 · 🌌 astro-ph.SR · physics.space-ph

Turbulence in the Local Interstellar Medium and the IBEX Ribbon

E. J. Zirnstein , J. Giacalone , R. Kumar , D. J. McComas , M. A. Dayeh , J. Heerikhuisen This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-24 19:54 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌌 astro-ph.SR physics.space-ph
keywords IBEX ribbonVLISM turbulencemagnetic mirroringheliosphere interactionVoyager 1 observationsparticle trappinginterstellar magnetic field
0
0 comments X

The pith

Turbulence in the VLISM at scales of 100 au or larger produces an IBEX ribbon whose large-scale structure mismatches observations, while scales of 10 au or smaller yield a smoother ribbon consistent with data.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper simulates the motion of energetic charged particles through a turbulent magnetic field in the very local interstellar medium, superposed on either a uniform or MHD-derived mean field, to test how turbulence shapes the IBEX ribbon. It finds that the magnetic mirror force remains important for particle trapping, yet the ribbon does not develop a double-peaked structure. When turbulent fluctuations follow Voyager 1 power levels at scales of 100 au and above, the resulting ribbon's large-scale features become inconsistent with IBEX maps; restricting the maximum fluctuation scale to about 10 au restores agreement with the observed smooth ribbon. Different random realizations of the turbulence affect only small angular features below 10 degrees, while the overall ribbon shape stays robust at the smaller scale limit. This leads to the conclusion that magnetic field structure below 10 au is set by the heliosphere's interaction with the VLISM rather than by homogeneous interstellar turbulence alone.

Core claim

The inclusion of turbulent fluctuations at scales ≳100 au with power consistent with Voyager 1 observations produces a ribbon whose large-scale structure is inconsistent with IBEX observations, whereas restricting the fluctuations to ∼10 au or smaller produces a smoother ribbon structure similar to IBEX observations. Different turbulence realizations produce different small-scale features ≲10° in the ribbon, but its large-scale structure is robust if the maximum fluctuation size is ∼10 au. The ribbon thickness is considerably larger if the large-scale mean field is draped around the heliosphere, and the magnetic mirror force still plays an important role in trapping particles even though the

What carries the argument

Motion of charged particles under the magnetic mirror force in a turbulent magnetic field superposed on a large-scale mean field (uniform or MHD-derived), with turbulence modeled as a homogeneous random field whose power spectrum is set by Voyager 1 measurements.

If this is right

  • The observed IBEX ribbon constrains the dominant turbulent fluctuation scale in the VLISM to be no larger than about 10 au.
  • The heliosphere-VLISM interaction, rather than pure interstellar turbulence, sets the magnetic field geometry that shapes the ribbon at scales below 10 au.
  • Particle trapping by magnetic mirroring remains effective for ribbon formation even when the ribbon lacks a double-peaked profile.
  • MHD-derived draped mean fields around the heliosphere increase ribbon thickness compared with uniform-field assumptions.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Ribbon maps could serve as an indirect probe of the spatial transition between heliospherically influenced fields and truly interstellar turbulence.
  • Future particle-tracing models may need to incorporate spatially varying turbulence spectra that decay away from the heliopause rather than assuming homogeneity throughout the VLISM.
  • High-resolution IBEX or future mission data on ribbon small-scale features could distinguish between different turbulence realizations once the maximum scale is fixed at 10 au.

Load-bearing premise

The turbulent magnetic field component can be treated as a homogeneous random field whose power spectrum and amplitude at the tested scales are correctly given by Voyager 1 measurements.

What would settle it

A direct measurement in the VLISM of magnetic fluctuation power at scales between 10 and 100 au that is substantially lower than the Voyager 1 spectrum used in the simulations, combined with a ribbon map that still shows the large-scale inconsistencies predicted for the high-power case.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1907.07714 by D. J. McComas, E. J. Zirnstein, J. Giacalone, J. Heerikhuisen, M. A. Dayeh, R. Kumar.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Neutral SW flux at the termination shock, INSW,TS, as a function of energy and heliographic latitude. We show data time-averaged from 2000 through 2009, which approximately corresponds to the observation time of IBEX from 2009-2013. The magnetic lines show the central energies of the IBEX-Hi energy channels, with ranges in latitude that cover fluxes greater than half of the maximum at that energy. INSW, at… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Kolmogorov power-law spectra with different parameters used in this study. Theoretical spectra (solid/dashed gray and black curves) are calculated using Equation (9). The power spectrum similar to that used by GJ15 is shown as the dashed gray curve (LC = 4 pc, σC = 4 µG), and the power spectrum similar to Burlaga et al. (2018) required to match the Voyager 1 observations is shown as the solid gray curve (L… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Model ribbon partial-sky maps at 1.1 keV for Cases 1 (λU = 10 au) and 4 (λU = 500 au) in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Model ribbon partial-sky maps at 1.1 keV for different spectrum upper limits, λU (Cases 1-4 in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Model ribbon partial-sky maps at 1.1 keV for λU = 50 and 500 au, from three different turbulence spectrum realizations. Note that “Realization #1” is the same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Model ribbon partial-sky maps at 1.1 keV for λU = 10 au and Realization #1. For this result, we decreased the mover tolerance such that the error in energy of a 1.1 keV particle over a typical charge-exchange life time (~2 yr) is <2%. We show the model without the IBEX instrument angular collimator response (left), with the collimator response (middle), and 5 yr time-averaged IBEX data (right) from McComas… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: We follow ~50,000 particles with radial speed 400 km s [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Illustration of the test particle system used to compute particle pitch angle distributions in Section 3.3. The directions in the sky from which the pitch angle distributions are extracted from are shown as the solid black (θ = 0°), solid red and blue (θ = +10° and -10°) and dashed red and blue lines (θ = +20° and -20°). Adapted from GJ15. sin(30°) < cos(θ) < sin(30°), -30° < φ < 30°. Note that we only rel… view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Particle pitch angle distribution in uniform mean ISMF (B0 directed towards +z axis) using the same turbulence field δB from [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Same as [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_9.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The effects of turbulence in the very local interstellar medium (VLISM) have been proposed by Giacalone & Jokipii (2015) to be important in determining the structure of the Interstellar Boundary Explorer (IBEX) ribbon via particle trapping by magnetic mirroring. We further explore this effect by simulating the motion of charged particles in a turbulent magnetic field superposed on a large-scale mean field, which we have considered to be either spatially-uniform or a mean field derived from a 3D MHD simulation. We find that the ribbon is not double-peaked, in contrast to Giacalone & Jokipii (2015). However, the magnetic mirror force still plays an important role in trapping particles. Furthermore, the ribbon$'$s thickness is considerably larger if the large-scale mean field is draped around the heliosphere. Voyager 1 observations in the VLISM show a turbulent field component that is stronger than previously thought, which we test in our simulation. We find that the inclusion of turbulent fluctuations at scales ${\gtrsim}$100 au and power consistent with Voyager 1 observations produces a ribbon whose large-scale structure is inconsistent with IBEX observations. However, restricting the fluctuations to ${\sim}$10 au or smaller produces a smoother ribbon structure similar to IBEX observations. Different turbulence realizations produce different small-scale features ${\lesssim}10{\deg}$ in the ribbon, but its large-scale structure is robust if the maximum fluctuation size is ${\sim}$10 au. This suggests that the magnetic field structure at scales ${\lesssim}$10 au is determined by the heliosphere$'$s interaction with the VLISM and cannot entirely be represented by homogeneous interstellar turbulence.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript uses particle-tracing simulations to examine how turbulence in the VLISM affects the IBEX ribbon. Turbulent magnetic fluctuations with power spectra and amplitudes taken from Voyager 1 are superposed on either a uniform mean field or an MHD-derived draped field. The authors report that the ribbon is not double-peaked (in contrast to Giacalone & Jokipii 2015), that magnetic mirroring remains important for particle trapping, and that ribbon thickness increases when the mean field is draped. The central result is that including fluctuations at scales ≳100 au produces large-scale ribbon morphology inconsistent with IBEX data, while restricting the maximum fluctuation scale to ∼10 au yields smoother ribbons whose large-scale structure matches observations; different realizations affect only small-scale (<10°) features when the cutoff is ∼10 au. The authors conclude that field structure at ≲10 au scales is set by heliosphere-VLISM interaction and cannot be fully captured by homogeneous interstellar turbulence.

Significance. If the scale-dependent results are robust, the work supplies a concrete constraint on the turbulence scales that can be present in the VLISM while remaining consistent with the observed IBEX ribbon. It also supplies evidence that Voyager 1 spectra at the largest scales may contain heliospheric interaction signatures rather than pure interstellar turbulence. The use of both uniform and MHD mean fields plus multiple turbulence realizations provides a useful check on the robustness of the large-scale morphology.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and simulation setup] Abstract and simulation-setup paragraph: the claim that power at scales ≳100 au produces ribbon structure inconsistent with IBEX rests on the assumption that the Voyager 1 spectrum at those scales represents a homogeneous random field of interstellar origin. The manuscript provides no test or discussion of whether those large-scale fluctuations could instead contain draping, compression, or other heliosphere-induced signatures, which would invalidate the homogeneous-superposition runs used to demonstrate inconsistency.
  2. [Results on ribbon morphology] Results section on ribbon morphology: the statement that restricting fluctuations to ∼10 au produces a ribbon “similar to IBEX observations” is presented without quantitative metrics (e.g., angular width, intensity contrast, or goodness-of-fit measures) or convergence tests with respect to the number of particles or grid resolution, making it difficult to assess how strongly the data support the scale cutoff.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract contains a typographical artifact (“ribbon$'$s”).
  2. Notation for the turbulence cutoff scale is given as both “∼10 au or smaller” and “maximum fluctuation size is ∼10 au”; a single, explicit definition would improve clarity.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their constructive and insightful comments. We respond to each major comment below and will incorporate revisions to address the points raised.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and simulation setup] Abstract and simulation-setup paragraph: the claim that power at scales ≳100 au produces ribbon structure inconsistent with IBEX rests on the assumption that the Voyager 1 spectrum at those scales represents a homogeneous random field of interstellar origin. The manuscript provides no test or discussion of whether those large-scale fluctuations could instead contain draping, compression, or other heliosphere-induced signatures, which would invalidate the homogeneous-superposition runs used to demonstrate inconsistency.

    Authors: We agree that the assumption of homogeneous turbulence is central and merits explicit discussion. Our results show that superposing homogeneous fluctuations at ≳100 au (with Voyager amplitudes) produces large-scale ribbon morphology inconsistent with IBEX, while smaller scales do not. This outcome itself indicates that the VLISM field at those scales cannot be purely homogeneous interstellar turbulence and must incorporate heliospheric interaction effects. We will revise the abstract and add a paragraph in the discussion section to clarify the modeling assumptions, note the possible heliospheric contributions to Voyager spectra at large scales, and discuss how this supports our conclusion that ≲10 au structure is set by the heliosphere-VLISM interaction. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results on ribbon morphology] Results section on ribbon morphology: the statement that restricting fluctuations to ∼10 au produces a ribbon “similar to IBEX observations” is presented without quantitative metrics (e.g., angular width, intensity contrast, or goodness-of-fit measures) or convergence tests with respect to the number of particles or grid resolution, making it difficult to assess how strongly the data support the scale cutoff.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the current manuscript relies on qualitative visual comparison. In the revised version we will add quantitative metrics, including the measured angular width (FWHM) of the ribbon and the peak-to-background intensity contrast, for the uniform-field and draped-field cases with different turbulence cutoffs. We will also report results from a convergence test varying the number of traced particles (e.g., 10^5 to 10^6) to confirm that the reported large-scale morphology is insensitive to particle count above our nominal value. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; forward simulations from external inputs

full rationale

The paper performs particle-tracing simulations that take the turbulent power spectrum and amplitude as direct inputs from Voyager 1 VLISM observations, superposed on either uniform or independently-derived MHD mean fields. Ribbon morphology for different fluctuation scale cutoffs is then compared to IBEX data. No step reduces a claimed prediction to a fitted parameter by construction, nor does any load-bearing premise collapse to a self-citation chain; the Giacalone & Jokipii (2015) reference is cited only for motivation and is explicitly contrasted with the new results. The derivation remains self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The model rests on standard Lorentz-force particle motion and MHD mean-field assumptions; turbulence amplitude and spectrum are taken from Voyager 1 without additional fitting parameters introduced in the abstract.

axioms (2)
  • standard math Charged-particle trajectories obey the Lorentz force including magnetic mirror term in a superposition of mean plus turbulent field.
    Standard plasma-physics equation of motion invoked throughout the simulation description.
  • domain assumption Turbulent fluctuations at the tested scales can be represented as a statistically homogeneous random field whose power matches Voyager 1 observations.
    Invoked when scaling the turbulence to Voyager 1 data and when restricting maximum fluctuation size.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5863 in / 1371 out tokens · 24323 ms · 2026-05-24T19:54:02.578369+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    Batchelor, G. K. 1960, The Theory of Homogeneous Turbulence (2 nd ed.; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)

    work page 1960

  2. [2]

    F., Florinski, V., & Ness, N

    Burlaga, L. F., Florinski, V., & Ness, N. F. 2015, ApJL, 804, L31

    work page 2015

  3. [3]

    F., Florinski, V., & Ness, N

    Burlaga, L. F., Florinski, V., & Ness, N. F. 2018, ApJ, 854, 20

    work page 2018

  4. [4]

    A., Czechowski, A., & Grygorczuk, J

    Bzowski, M., Kubiak, M. A., Czechowski, A., & Grygorczuk, J. 2017, ApJ, 845, 15

    work page 2017

  5. [5]

    2009, 143, 177

    Bzowski, M., Möbius, E., Tarnopolski, S., Izmodenov, V., & Gloeckler, G. 2009, 143, 177

    work page 2009

  6. [6]

    M., Tokumaru, M., et al

    Bzowski, M., Sokół, J. M., Tokumaru, M., et al. 2013, in Cross-Calibration of Far UV Spectra of Solar System Objects and the Heliosphere, ed. E. Quémerais, M. Snow, & R.-M. Bonnet (New York: Springer), 67

    work page 2013

  7. [7]

    I., Dayeh, M

    Desai, M. I., Dayeh, M. A., Allegrini, F., et al. 2019, ApJ, in press

    work page 2019

  8. [8]

    2017, ApJ, 838, 50

    Florinski, V., & Heerikhuisen, J. 2017, ApJ, 838, 50

    work page 2017

  9. [9]

    2016, ApJ, 826, 197

    Florinski, V., Heerikhuisen, J., Niemiec, J., & Ernst, A. 2016, ApJ, 826, 197

    work page 2016

  10. [10]

    P., Heerikhuisen, J., Hu, Q., & Khazanov, I

    Florinski, V., Zank, G. P., Heerikhuisen, J., Hu, Q., & Khazanov, I. 2010, ApJ, 719, 1097

    work page 2010

  11. [11]

    V., Richardson, J

    Fraternale, F., Pogorelov, N. V., Richardson, J. D., & Tordella, D. 2019, ApJ, 872, 40

    work page 2019

  12. [12]

    O., Allegrini, F., Bochsler, P., et al

    Funsten, H. O., Allegrini, F., Bochsler, P., et al. 2009, SSRv, 146, 75

    work page 2009

  13. [13]

    A., Bochsler, P., Chornay, D., et al

    Fuselier, S. A., Bochsler, P., Chornay, D., et al. 2009, SSRv, 146, 117

    work page 2009

  14. [14]

    V., Heerikhuisen, J., & Rassoul, H

    Gamayunov, K. V., Heerikhuisen, J., & Rassoul, H. 2017, ApJ, 845, 63

    work page 2017

  15. [15]

    V., Heerikhuisen, J., & Rassoul, H

    Gamayunov, K. V., Heerikhuisen, J., & Rassoul, H. 2019, ApJL, 876, L21

    work page 2019

  16. [16]

    2010, ApJ, 725, 2251

    Gamayunov, K., Zhang, M., & Rassoul, H. 2010, ApJ, 725, 2251

    work page 2010

  17. [17]

    Giacalone, J., & Jokipii, J. R. 1999, ApJ, 520, 204 18

    work page 1999

  18. [18]

    Giacalone, J., & Jokipii, J. R. 2015, ApJL, 812, L9

    work page 2015

  19. [19]

    2004, A&A, 426, 845

    Gloeckler, G., Möbius, E., Geiss, J., et al. 2004, A&A, 426, 845

    work page 2004

  20. [20]

    2011, ApJL, 727, L48

    Grygorczuk, J., Ratkiewicz, R., Strumik, M., & Grzedzielski, S. 2011, ApJL, 727, L48

    work page 2011

  21. [21]

    A., Kurth, W

    Gurnett, D. A., Kurth, W. S., Burlaga, L. F., Ness, N. F. 2013, Sci, 341, 1489

    work page 2013

  22. [22]

    Heerikhuisen, J., & Pogorelov, N. V. 2010, in ASP Conf. Ser. 429, Numerical Modeling of Space Plasma Flows, ASTRONUM-2009, ed. N. V. Pogorelov, E. Audit, & G. P. Zank (San Francisco, CA: ASP), 227

    work page 2010

  23. [23]

    V., & Zank, G

    Heerikhuisen, J., Pogorelov, N. V., & Zank, G. P. 2013, in ASP Conf. Ser. 474, Numerical Modeling of Space Plasma Flows, ASTRONUM-2012, ed. N. V. Pogorelov, E. Audit, & G. P. Zank (San Francisco, CA: ASP), 195

    work page 2013

  24. [24]

    Heerikhuisen, J., & Pogorelov, N. V. 2011, ApJ, 738, 29

    work page 2011

  25. [25]

    V., Zank, G

    Heerikhuisen, J., Pogorelov, N. V., Zank, G. P., et al. 2010, ApJL, 708, L126

    work page 2010

  26. [26]

    J., Funsten, H

    Heerikhuisen, J., Zirnstein, E. J., Funsten, H. O., Pogorelov, N. V., & Zank, G. P. 2014, ApJ, 784, 73

    work page 2014

  27. [27]

    Isenberg, P. A. 2014, ApJ, 787, 76

    work page 2014

  28. [28]

    Isenberg, P. A. 2015, JPCS, 577, 012014

    work page 2015

  29. [29]

    A., Forbes, T

    Isenberg, P. A., Forbes, T. G., & Möbius, E. 2015, ApJ, 805, 153

    work page 2015

  30. [30]

    A., Swaczyna, P., Bzowski, M., et al

    Kubiak, M. A., Swaczyna, P., Bzowski, M., et al. 2016, ApJS, 223, 25

    work page 2016

  31. [31]

    2010, in AIP Conf

    Lallement, R., Quémerais, E., Koutroumpa, D., et al. 2010, in AIP Conf. Ser. 1216, Twelfth International Solar Wind Conference, ed. M. Maksimovic, K. Issautier, N. Meyer-Vernet, M. Moncuquet, & F. Pantellini (Melville, NY: AIP), 555

    work page 2010

  32. [32]

    A., Fahr, H

    Lee, M. A., Fahr, H. J., Kucharek, H., et al. 2009, SSRv, 146, 275

    work page 2009

  33. [33]

    J., Allegrini, F., Bzowski, M., et al

    McComas, D. J., Allegrini, F., Bzowski, M., et al. 2014, ApJS, 213, 20

    work page 2014

  34. [34]

    J., Bzowski, M., Fuselier, S

    McComas, D. J., Bzowski, M., Fuselier, S. A., et al. 2015, ApJS, 220, 22

    work page 2015

  35. [35]

    J., Zirnstein, E

    McComas, D. J., Zirnstein, E. J., Bzowski, M., et al. 2017, ApJS, 229, 41 Möbius, E., Bochsler, P., Bzowski, M., et al. 2009, Sci, 326, 969 Möbius, E., Liu, K., Funsten, H., Gary, S. P., & Winske, D. 2013, ApJ, 766, 129

    work page 2017

  36. [36]

    2016, ApJ, 826, 198

    Niemiec, J., Florinski, V., Heerikhuisen, J., Nishikawa, K.-I. 2016, ApJ, 826, 198

    work page 2016

  37. [37]

    2016, ApJ, 833, 130

    Park, J., Kucharek, H., Möbius, E., et al. 2016, ApJ, 833, 130

    work page 2016

  38. [38]

    V., Heerikhuisen, J., Zank, G

    Pogorelov, N. V., Heerikhuisen, J., Zank, G. P., et al. 2011, ApJ, 742, 104

    work page 2011

  39. [39]

    V., Zank, G

    Pogorelov, N. V., Zank, G. P., Borovikov, S. N., et al. 2008, in ASP Conf. Ser. 385, Numerical Modeling of Space Plasma Flows, ed. N. V. Pogorelov, E. Audit, & G. P. Zank (San

    work page 2008

  40. [40]

    H., Teukolsky, S

    Press, W. H., Teukolsky, S. A., Vetterling, W. T., & Flannery, B. P. 2002, Numerical Recipes in C: The Art of Scientific Computing (2nd ed.; Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press)

    work page 2002

  41. [41]

    2012, ApJ, 756, 3

    Ratkiewicz, R., Strumik, M., & Grygorczuk, J. 2012, ApJ, 756, 3

    work page 2012

  42. [42]

    A., Bzowski, M., Crew, G

    Schwadron, N. A., Bzowski, M., Crew, G. B., et al. 2009, Sci, 326, 966

    work page 2009

  43. [43]

    A., & McComas, D

    Schwadron, N. A., & McComas, D. J. 2013, ApJ, 764, 92

    work page 2013

  44. [44]

    Interstellar Neutral Gas Species And Their Pickup Ions Inside The Heliospheric Termination Shock. Ionization Rates For H, O, Ne, And He

    Schwadron, N. A., Möbius, E., McComas, D. J., et al. 2016, ApJ, 828, 81 19 Sokół, J. M., Bzowski, M., & Tokumaru, M. 2019, ApJ, in press, arXiv:1809.09823v2 Sokół, J. M., Swaczyna, P., Bzowski, M., & Tokumaru, M. 2015, SoPh, 290, 2589

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  45. [45]

    C., Cummings, A

    Stone, E. C., Cummings, A. C., McDonald, F. B., et al. 2013, Sci, 341, 150

    work page 2013

  46. [46]

    2011, ApJL, 741, L6

    Strumik, M., Ben-Jaffel, L., Ratkiewicz, R., & Grygorczuk, J. 2011, ApJL, 741, L6

    work page 2011

  47. [47]

    J., Viñas, A

    Summerlin, E. J., Viñas, A. F., Moore, T. E., Christian, E. R., & Cooper, J. F. 2014, ApJ, 793, 93

    work page 2014

  48. [48]

    Zank, G. P. 1999, SSRv, 89, 413

    work page 1999

  49. [49]

    Zank, G. P. 2015, ARAA, 53, 449

    work page 2015

  50. [50]

    P., Du, S., & Hunana, P

    Zank, G. P., Du, S., & Hunana, P. 2017, ApJ, 842, 114

    work page 2017

  51. [51]

    J., Heerikhuisen, J., & Dayeh, M

    Zirnstein, E. J., Heerikhuisen, J., & Dayeh, M. A. 2018, ApJ, 855, 30

    work page 2018

  52. [52]

    J., Heerikhuisen, J., Funsten, H

    Zirnstein, E. J., Heerikhuisen, J., Funsten, H. O., et al. 2016, ApJL, 818, L18

    work page 2016

  53. [53]

    J., Heerikhuisen, J., Zank, G

    Zirnstein, E. J., Heerikhuisen, J., Zank, G. P., et al. 2017, ApJ, 836, 238

    work page 2017

  54. [54]

    J., McComas, D

    Zirnstein, E. J., McComas, D. J., Schwadron, N. A., et al. 2019, ApJ, 876, 92

    work page 2019